TESON Benchmark Report and Overview PDF
TESON Benchmark Report and Overview PDF
TESON Benchmark Report and Overview PDF
1 Executive Summary
The in situ set pressure verification, also known as on-line safety and relief valve
testing has been recognised in industry since the early 80s. Different testing systems
are to be found on the market since then.
TESON did introduce a totally new approach on how to identify the set pressure within
the result diagrams, created during the test procedure itself. Focusing on the fact,
that a safety relief valve is primarily a preloaded spring, a spring performance diagram
(force-lift-diagram) is generated from the recorded data. Within the spring
performance diagram, the set pressure is easily and precisely found at the moment the
valve disk starts to move.
Considering the fact that the on-line test result is calculated, this leads to an uncertain
theoretical result. Based on the calculus of error, the resulting uncertainty decreases
the larger the valve is and the more line pressure (system pressure) there is when the
valve is tested.
To verify how close the TESON test results gets to the real set pressure, comparison
tests have been carried out on a large volume test bench of a safety valve
manufacturer in Bristol, U.K. A total of 32 tests have been carried out on 8 valves of
different sizes at various line pressures. To most accurately find the set pressure point
of the valves, the test bench was equipped with a digital lift and pressure recording
system.
Testing the new and overhauled valves, it became evident that initial lift and first
audible leak appear together. Therefore, the set pressure identified on a test bench
can be considered the real set pressure of a safety valve. Identifying the set pressure
based on the initial lift as well, TESON reaches high result accuracy.
Within the 32 tests carried out, the worst divergence between the test bench result
and the TESON result was 5% where as 75% of the tests had a divergence of 3% or
less. Most surprising, the divergence to be found is independent of valve size and line
pressure. Based on those results, TESON has been proven to most accurately tell the
real set pressure of the safety relief valve.
Experiences show that on-line valve tests carried out in all different types of industrial
plants lead to a significantly higher or lower set pressure of safety relief valves. As the
TESON system has proven to tell the true set pressure, the explanation for the
divergence is the valve in operational condition being different to the valve in
workshop conditions when tested on the test bench.
Whenever the safety relief valves set pressure is of a higher concern, it should be
tested on-line in its operational conditions if possible.
2/14
TESON Benchmark
Content
4.2 Identifying the set pressure within the TESON test result_________________ 10
6 Appendix _____________________________________________________________ 14
3/14
TESON Benchmark
2 Introduction
Identifying a safety valves set pressure in-situ while the connected pressure vessel
remains in full operation is known as "on-line" testing or "in-situ set pressure
verification" since the early 80's. This method utilises lifting equipment so called test
rigs to open safety valves by pulling the valves spindle, recording the lifting force and
the lift and pressure simultaneously. An expert is capable of identifying the set
pressure point from the recorded diagram and to calculate the set pressure of the
safety valve.
TESON introduces a totally new and unique approach to on-line safety valve testing.
The analysis and identification of the set pressure point based on a lift-force diagram
and the spring performance of the safety valve that is created from the lift and force
data, recorded during the test procedure itself. That approach leads to a clearly visible
point in each diagram recorded, which is the very moment when the valve disk starts
to lift from the nozzle. Within the TESON test, the "lifting point" is defined to be the
set pressure point of the safety valve.
The TESON approach does not require expertise and long time experience to find this
lifting point, eliminating the option to technically "negotiate" a result towards a
desired value there by. Neither does it require any observation of the valve during the
test to find the set pressure point later. The only required source is the diagram itself,
enabling a correct analysis even a long time after the test itself has been carried out.
As TESON is recognised on the market to deliver most accurate results, a benchmark
test should give a final overall accuracy where this is possible to be achieved.
Due to the fact, that a standard workshop test bench can never offer enough pressure
capacity to simulate an on-line valve test, it requires a huge volume test bench that
can only be found in development laboratories of safety valve manufactures. Seetru
Ltd, situated in Bristol, operates a development test bench, which is capable of
identifying the real set pressure of a safety valve, as well as simulating the on-line test
for the TESON system, which is utilised by their service department SES Seetru
Engineering Services.
This document is the full report of the benchmark test performed at Seetru Ltd. in May
2003. It includes all details of the test set up, test procedures, as well as all test
reports created during the two-day experiment in Bristol, U.K.
All tests have been carried out under the supervision of Andrew Varga, MD Seetru Ltd.,
and Johannes Junior, MD METRUS GmbH, designer and producer of the TESON system.
4/14
TESON Benchmark
Fig. 1 Development test bench of Seetru Ltd. at Albion Dockside Works, Bristol, U.K.
Using a 3 way balanced valve, pressure is charged from the main air storage tank into
the blow-down vessel (see Fig. 2).
To maintain accurate pressure recording, the pressure sensor is tapped close to the
flange where the valve is to be tested, which is mounted onto the blow-down vessel
(see Fig. 3).
5/14
TESON Benchmark
Two pressure sensors (acc. < 0.3 %) have been used to cover the different set pressures
of the valves to be tested. One 0 16 bar sensor covers lower set pressures and one 0-
100 bar sensor covers set pressures above 16 bar (see Table 1 on page 8). Both sensors
had been purchased specially for the benchmark test.
Fig. 4 Laser sensor (blue item) mounted on the test sample, using the TESON rig
6/14
TESON Benchmark
The Valve Test 2.0 software offers an easy to handle graphical user interface that
enables the user to follow the test, looking at the diagrams as they are created. Once
the test is done, the user easily flips from the standard diagram to the valve
characteristic by simply clicking on the related tab sheet header (see Fig. 5).
Fig. 5 Valve Test 2.0 GUI with standard diagram recorded over time
Using markers, the set pressure and reseating pressure are simply picked within the
diagram itself.
Fig. 6 TESON ser. no. 002 test rig Fig. 7 TESON Power Box and computer
7/14
TESON Benchmark
The electronic system was calibrated to an accuracy of < 0.02 % before the test was
carried out.
With the numeric values taken from the set pressure point picked in the diagram,
TESON calculates the set pressure using the following formula:
8/14
TESON Benchmark
F
p Set = + p Sys
AS
PSet Safety valve set pressure
PSys System pressure at set pressure point [pa]
AS Active valve seat area [m]
F Hydraulic force at set pressure point [N]
4 Test procedure
Considering the formula, the safety valves seat diameter and seat geometry will
influence the on-line test result accuracy as much as the system pressure during the
test. Therefore, comparison tests have to be carried out at various levels of system
pressures for various sizes of valves.
Eight valves of various sizes and types have been selected for testing, first on the
development test bench only and afterwards by the TESON system. A TESON test is
performed at a level of approximately 0%, 25%, 50% and 75% of the set pressure. For
each level, the TESON result is calculated using the active seat area provided by the
valve manufacturer (OEM diameter) wherever available or the mean measured
diameter of the valves seat.
Comparing the TESON and the development test bench results leads to the final
benchmark result. The development test bench result is considered the "true" set
pressure of the safety valve. To withstand third party investigations, the set pressure is
always identified using the same method. This method is based only on the result
diagrams and does not leave any space for individual interpretation.
9/14
TESON Benchmark
Fig. 9 Set pressure point in the valve characteristic diagram of the Valve Test 2.0 software
To precisely pick the set pressure point, a zoom function is available within the
software (see Fig. 10)
4.2 Identifying the set pressure within the TESON test result
As outlined in the introduction, TESON generates a lift-force-diagram (spring
performance) from the lift and force data, recorded during the test itself. Such a
diagram can be seen in Fig. 11
Disk movement
10/14
TESON Benchmark
No matter how the graph shape might look in the disc movement section, the end of
the test rig compression when the disc initially starts to move can always be found.
This is the point where TESON defines the set pressure to be. A zooming function
supports the most accurate pin pointing of that set pressure point (see Fig. 12).
A printed report for each test is attached to this report to verify the proper selection
of the TESON set pressure point. Each report can be identified using the unique test ID.
11/14
TESON Benchmark
5 Test results
A total of 32 tests have been performed with TESON. Each valve was first tested with
Valve test 2.0 and afterwards with TESON. The column named "Set pr.[bar]" holds the
development test bench result.
The column "Divergence [%]" is calculated as per:
An overview report on all TESON test records, as well as a detailed one-page report on
each TESON test on each test bench test can be found in the appendix. Please refer to
the Test ID of each row to find the related TESON test report. Valve Test 2.0 reports
are to be identified via the serial no. of the valve.
12/14
TESON Benchmark
The divergence of the TESON result and the test bench result of a large
volume test bench was never worse than 5 %
The divergence of the TESON result and the large volume test bench result
is independent from the seat area size and independent from the actual set
pressure level during the test
5.2 Conclusions
When testing a new valve on a large volume development test bench that is capable of
simulating real plant conditions, the first audible leak and initial lift appear together.
Considering the safety function of a safety valve, the initial lift point is defined by
various safety valve manufacturers to be the true set pressure. As the TESON test
offers a precise method of finding the initial lift point of the valve, it tests the real set
pressure of the valve. With a worse case divergence of 5% within the 32 tests carried
13/14
TESON Benchmark
out and a majority of tests with a divergence of 3% or better, TESON tests the true set
pressure with a high degree of accuracy.
Considering the influences affecting the set pressure of a safety valve from the test
bench to the plant, and the changes of the valves condition due to operation, the on-
line test of a safety valve in situ using TESON is the most reliable method to verify the
set pressure of a safety relief valve wherever it is possible from a technical and
operations safety point of view.
6 Appendix
The following documents are to be found within this appendix.
Valve Data
Bench test printed reports
TESON printed reports
Calibration certificates
Valve Data
METRUS GmbH
Heinrich-Vogl-Str. 25
DE 85560 Ebersberg
T. +49 (8092) 868600
F. +49 (89) 954399993
[email protected]
14/14
TESON Test Report
Benchmark Test Development Test Bench
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
[mm] [sec]
Marker colours: Graph colours:
sec mm
kN
ID 4 25% system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 6 50 % system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 8 75 % system pressure test
sec mm
Page 1
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 10 86 % system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 12 75 % system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 14 50 % system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 16 25 % system pressure test
sec mm
Page 2
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 18 Cold test
sec mm
kN
ID 21 75% system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 22 50% system pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 23 25% system pressure test
sec mm
Page 3
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 25 Cold test
sec mm
kN
ID 26 90% System pressure
sec mm
kN
ID 29 75 % System pressure
sec mm
kN
ID 30 50 % System pressure
sec mm
Page 4
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 38 50% system pressure
Manufacturer Birkett
Serial No 04788
sec mm
kN
ID 39 25% system pressure
Manufacturer Birkett
Serial No 04788
sec mm
kN
ID 40 75% system pressure
Serial No 96.293363/1
sec mm
kN
ID 41 75% system pressure 2nd
Serial No 96.293363/1
sec mm
Page 5
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 42 90% system pressure
Serial No 96.293363/1
sec mm
kN
ID 43 50% system pressure
Serial No 96.293363/1
sec mm
kN
ID 44 25% system pressure
Serial No 96.293363/1
sec mm
kN
ID 45 Cold test
Serial No 96.293363/1
sec mm
Page 6
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 46 25% system pressure
sec mm
kN
ID 49 50% system pressure
sec mm
kN
ID 51 75% system pressure
sec mm
kN
ID 52 90% system pressure
sec mm
Page 7
TESON - Benchmark tests
Overview report
kN
ID 64 90% set pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 65 75% set pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 66 50% set pressure test
sec mm
kN
ID 67 25% set pressure test
sec mm
Page 8